Kenneth Tellis
Quebec's Quiet Revolution
By Kenneth T. Tellis
Apr 6, 2008 - 11:00:11 PM

The French defeat on September 13, 1759, has created a hatred that has lingered on for over two centuries in the minds of "les canadiens" (Quebecois).

Just how is the French-Canadian or Quebec's "Quiet Revolution" similar to the Chavez "Bolivarian Revolution" in Venezuela, when the facts have proven otherwise? It might be a grandiose attempt by some Quebecois politicians to lay such outrageous claims such as these, but when viewed, all the comparisons become odious.

First let's begin with Quebec's Racist Language Laws. What criteria do they meet?  They have in essense violated every aspect of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights Charter which Canada signed on December 10, 1948 and which also applies to the province of QUEBEC, which is part of the Canadian Confederation.

Of course the claim that the people of Quebec are similar in many ways to the people's of South America is very true. But why have ‘les canadiens' in the past denied this fact and continued to call themselves canadien-français/canadienne-française or French? Was this not in denial of their Native American Indian bloodlines? What was their reason to claim otherwise, if not wanting to be recognized as European and WHITE by the world at large?

The new attempt to admit that the canadien/canadienne are a mixture of European and a little less Native American Indians than South Americans, goes to show the new mindset of a people who first denied their Indian heritage and then turn around and suddenly stake a claim to it. But to further claim, that they are under pressure from the Anglo-Saxon imperialism of the United States of America, just like South America cannot be supported by any evidence to the contrary. What pressure does the United States of America exert on these ersatz French-Canadiens?  U.S. based corporations in Canada have given the 'les canadiens/canadiennes' full-time jobs for which they really should be thankful, rather than complain about being discriminated against. Thus all comparisons between South America and Quebec become meaningless. But the most illogical argument is this statement by some canadiens/canadiennes:

They claim that the French were the first European nation in far North America, when we know that the Spanish Conquistadores under Hernan Cortez landed in Mexico, before the French, so that argument is totally false. No mention is ever made of the Genovese explorer John Cabot (Giovanni Caboto) who landed on Newfoundland, Labrador and Nova Scotia in 1497 and claimed them for Henry VII of England. The Danish archives in Copenhagen, Denmark, discovered documents that show the Spanish explorer; Cristobal Colon (Christopher Columbus) had landed on the Labrador coast of Canada in 1515.  While the French explorer Jacques Cartier only landed in far North America in 1534, which is much later than Giovanni Caboto or Cristobal Colon. But French or canadien historians do not mention these exploits.

Now, to call the deportation of the Acadians in 1755 and 1762 as being an English crime has got to be the pits. Because the Acadians really had no rights, the fact being that France had ceded Acadia to Great Britain by the terms of the Treaty of Utrecht, April 17, 1713.

The Deportation of the Acadians began on September 4, 1755, and ended in 1762. But some very important facts have deliberately left out.  Because the deportation of the Acadians was not decided in Great Britain, as some Acadian and pseudo French-Canadian historians have concluded, but by American colonials, like Benjamin Franklin amongst others, who saw the Northern menace (French) for what they really were.  John Collier, Head of the Halifax Council actually passed the fateful resolution on July 28, 1755, to deport the Acadians from Nova Scotia.  Their reasoning was that the British colonies were unsafe, as long as they had French fifth columnist or so-called neutral French colonists (Acadians) in their midst, as was the case in 1755. The deportation took place after the ambush by the French and their Indian allies of the force of British regulars, some Indians and the colonial militia's under Colonel George Washington led by General Edward Braddock at Monongahela, not far from Fort Duquesne, later Fort Pitt (now Pittsburgh) on July 9, 1755, when no state of war existed between Great Britain and France. The rumor that British authorities had deported the Acadians because of their refusal to swear allegiance to the British crown is complete fabrication and is without any merit.

A few days before the ambush on Braddock's force, George Washington set out with an Indian guide to visit his friend Jack Fraser, a Scotsman who had his cabin in the woods a few days away from Mongahela, Pennsylvania. On reaching the cabin discovered that Jack Fraser and his wife were both killed and scalped.  While looking over the cabin, heard a noise coming from a woodpile beside the cabin. On moving some logs, found Jack Fraser two sons, hidden among the logs. They had been put there by their father, who heard the raiders coming towards his cabin. Washington then decided to take the two boys on to Philadelphia and leave them with relatives. It turns out that the raiding party was Canadien colonial militia, who had killed and scalped Jack Fraser and his wife, in order to make it look like the work of Indians.

Proof has now been uncovered, that some Acadian Catholic priests were urging Acadians to attack the British settlements in New England from the rear, in support of the French attack on British colonies in New England. The main instigator of this treachery was one Abbe (Father) Jean-Louis Le Loutre. And the deportation of the Acadians was carried out by members of the Massachusetts Militia, not British Redcoats as some canadien historians have falsely concluded.

The Attorney Warren Anthony Perrin of Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, a man of Acadian Ancestry was wrong to demand an apology from Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain, for the Deportation of the Acadians from Nova Scotia in 1755-62. Warren A. Perrin should have instead demanded an apology from the government of the United States of America for the deportation of the Acadians from Nova Scotia in 1755-62. But, it seems that he lacked the intestinal fortitude to pursue that approach.

What should also be considered is that the Acadians were alive to be deported, but the French along with their Indian allies usually scalped and killed or sold British prisoners, as slaves be they men, women or children, because they were Protestants. This was done at Fort Oswego and Fort William Henry, NY. In the case of Fort Oswego, Montcalm gave 20 British-American prisoners-of-war to his Indian allies to be killed and eaten, as they were short of food. Canadien historians have conveniently left all of this out of their history books.

"Imagine for minute that the U.S. invades a South American country, wins, and starts colonizing your country" they take control of your economy, the political power, the army the land, everything. They impose English as the only language of use in working environment, being born English to access staff positions in business, in public jobs, and in government.  Uses the army to heavily repress any show of discontent from the population. Not only the local army, but also the whole power of their empire. This is nothing more than a canadien/canadienne attempt to rewrite the history of the French and Indian War.

It was Major-General Montcalm whose French, le milice canadien (Metis), and Indian allies that invaded the British settlements and forts, in New York and in New England, capturing many of them and taking prisoners, later selling them as slaves.  These acts did not go unnoticed by the British, who upon building up their forces struck back at New France, and captured it, in its entirety. Again ‘les canadien' seem to suffer from selective amnesia and cannot remember these episodes of history. Because doing so, would expose their inferiority complexes and biases.

When the last French governor of New France (Quebec) Vaudreuil surrendered to Major-General Amherst at Montreal, New France on September 8, 1760, there were conditions set down under which the French army would lay down their arms and leave New France.

The final ceding of New France took place in Paris on February 10, 1763. The terms laid down by the Anglo-French Peace Treaty of Paris was this? That all former citizens of New France had a choice.  They could either sell all their property in New France and leave freely for France, Louisiana or any other French colony, and retain their status as French citizens, or stay in the ceded territory of New France and become British subjects, like those in the American colonies. Under the terms given them, 66,000 canadiens/canadiens former citizens of New France chose to become British subjects and stay on in the new British province of Quebec, formerly known as New France.

No Quebec politician admits to why the French lost New France. But the reasons were simple. The French treasury of King Louis XVI was plainly and simply bankrupt and had no money to buy supplies for his troops in North America. This being the case, the French commander in North America, Major-General Louis-Joseph de Montcalm-Gozon, Marquis de Sainte-Veran and the men under his command made forays into British settlements in New England, to rob, murder, and pillage them for new supplies. It was also the real reason, why British commander, Major-General James Wolf was able to defeat Montcalm and his badly equipped French and canadien forces on September 13, 1759, and the same reason why Major-General Amherst was able to defeat Governor Vaudreuil and his French and colonial forces in Montreal on September 8, 1760.

The odd part about Quebecois historians is they keep using the term English, when they really mean British. The defeat at Quebec was carried out by British forces, that is British regiments (Scots, Irish, Welsh and English) and British colonial forces, such as Moses Hazen's Rangers, Robert Rogers' Rangers, the Royal American Regiment, and a host of other British American colonial regiments. Thus, the word English becomes redundant, when being applied to the British forces in North America.

Just where did this canadien hatred of Americans begin?  Why, in the woods just outside Quebec City in the days just before its capture on September 10-13.  British Redcoats had entered the woods just outside Quebec City and were ambushed by Indian allies of the French and canadien militiamen. It was easy enough for the Indians and canadien militiamen to pick off the Redcoats in the woods, because of their bright coloured uniforms, and the Redcoats were being slaughtered.  It was just then that member of Moses Hazen's and Robt. Rogers Rangers, along with soldiers from the Royal American Regiment came to the aid of the British Redcoats in the woods. They told the Redcoats to remove and reverse their jackets, so that neither the canadien militia, nor the Indians could spot them easily. The battle then took a turn and the canadien militia and the Indians now were on the receiving end. It was then, that an order was given to the Redcoats, the Rangers and Royal American Regiment, not to take any prisoners. This order was actually done, because the massacre at Fort William Henry was remembered by the commanders and it was justified. And this is the very reason why the canadiens hate the Americans. It was that vital American support of the British Redcoats, which turned the tide of battle, and brought about the French defeat and surrender at Quebec, on September 13, 1759. But it seems that Quebecois hatred for Americans has lingered on from 1759, till the present time.

The British parliament in June 1774, in order to create a climate of peace and tranquility  in the province of Quebec passed the Quebec Act, which guaranteed the religious rights of canadien British subjects by permitting them the right to practice their Roman Catholic faith and use Latin in the rite of the Mass. But, this right did not apply to Britain's13 American colonies, where the Church of England held supreme power. Under the law in the American colonies all British subjects had to attend Church of England religious services at least twice a year, or pay a fine.  Now, this was offensive to men like Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin, who were not members of the Church of England, But it quite all right for men like George Washington, whose father was a Church of England, chaplain.  For this reason, the First American Continental Congress met at Carpenters Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on September 5, 1774, and addressed a declaration of rights and grievances to His Britannic Majesty King GeorgeIII. Following that protest to the king, and receiving no intent of changes to the Quebec Act of June 1774 by the British government, the American colonist began to think of a revolution. This ended with the Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee, offering a resolution on June 1776 calling for a "Declaration of Independence," which became a reality on July 4, 1776. On September 9, 1776, Second American Continental Congress replaced the term "United Colonies" with the term "United States", a term that was coined by that Great American revolutionary and thinker, Thomas Paine of Thetford, Norfolk, England.

Now to further expose historical revisionism that is being used in history books on Canada by the various authors, like l'Abbe Lionel Groulx and others of his ilk. No mention is made to an important fact of the history of Quebec. It was the British government that instituted the Legislature of Quebec in the 1790s. It gave les canadiens the right to vote and chose candidates to represent them. It must also be mentioned that the people of Quebec had no system of elected representatives, since this was not a policy in the governance of New France by the French monarchial system, which was after all a dictatorship under which the canadiens had lived from the early days of New France.  In the American colonies there had always existed assemblies, and in the Virginia colony the House of Burgesses. This was the way representative arrived in Quebec, via the British electoral system. Thus the British brought a form of democracy in which canadiens could partake in, which had not existed before for then.

We must not forget, that New France was after all the birthplace in North America of ethnocentricity. Think of Abraham Martin, the Irish Roman Catholic river pilot and canny fur trader.  Abraham Martin, like most Irish was an astute trader, so much so that he put his canadien competitors out of business. In retaliation, the canadiens used a trumped-up charge of him molesting a 9-year old girl. Abraham Martin saw no way out of the impasse and fled to Maine for his own safety. All his property was then confiscated and sold by the authorities in New France. Even then there was a law in France, by order of the king that did not permit French Protestants (Huguenots) from immigrating to New France. This is after all the tolerance that the canadiens were known for, with regards other religions in Quebec; the Quebecois themselves has sometimes lauded it.

Canadiens and their Sault and Algonquin Indian allies have been well known for their massacre of the residents of Schenectady (Corlaer), New York on February 9, 1690, who were mainly of Protestants of Dutch origin. This raid was led by d'Ailleboust de Manthet and Trois Riviere born, Jacques Le Moyne, sieur de Sainte-Helene, and his brother Pierre Le Moyne, sieur d'Iberville, on orders from the Governor of New France, Louis de Baude, sieur de Frontenac, comte de Palluau et Forest.  Remember, that it was also Louis de Baude, sieur de Frontenac, comte de Palluau et Forest, the Governor of New France, who first introduced black slaves in what today is the province of Quebec, on November 6, 1689.

The French and their Roman Catholic Indian allies, the Abenaki continued to make raids on New England villages and hamlets, killing and kidnapping British-American settlers and their family members. One of these kidnap victims was a five-year old girl named Lydia Longley. Who was taken to Montreal, New France and sold. An order of Catholic nuns purchased her and raised her. Lydia Longley later entered the Congregation of Notre Dame.  Pierre Le Moyne, sieur d'Iberville, along with French, French colonials and their Indian allies raided the British settlements in St. John's, Placentia, Ferryland and other parts of Newfoundland.  In his rampage Pierre Le Moyne murdered some 200 British settlers, looted their homes and set fire to them afterwards. But Pierre Le Moyne is considered a hero by the canadien. To put it mildly, Pierre Le Moyne, sieur d'Iberville, was really and truly a butcher. Le Moyne contracted Yellow Fever and died on July 7, 1706, in Havana, Cuba. But canadien historians consider none of this cruelty because it involves the killing of English-speaking Protestants.

There were many such forays made on British settlements in New England by the French and their Abenaki Indian allies. A raid by Jean-Francois Hertel de la Fresniere, and his sons Jean-Baptiste Hertel de Rouville, Rene-Ovide Hertel de Rouville, Etienne Hertel de Saint-Francois, Jean-Baptiste Melchior de Rouville and Joseph-Hippolyte Hertel de Saint-Francois on Salmon Falls, New Hampshire in 1690, in which they killed some 34 settlers and captured another 54, which they took back to Montreal, New France, put up for sale as slaves. One of these raids was on the small settlement of Wells, in the north western New England border area, on August 10, 1703. When British settlers of all ages and sexes met their deaths at the hands of the French, canadiens and their Abenaki Roman Catholic Indian allies.

Following that was a similar raid led by Jean-Baptiste Hertel, sieur de Rouville, and his brothers Charles-Francois, Michel and Joseph Hertel de Saint-Francois, accompanied by 20 other Frenchmen and 25 Abenaki Indian Roman Catholic Indians on th town of Deerfield, Northern Massachusetts on February 29, 1704, in which they not only massacred men, women and children, but also took back with them, what they considered the spoils of war, some 111 people of all ages to be sold in Montreal, New France. The long and arduous journey from Deerfield to Montreal in the dead of winter cost 21 prisoners their lives.

Jean-Baptiste Hertel, de Rouville, accompanied by Portneuf, Courtemanche, Saint- Castin and some of their Indian allies raided Casco (Portland), Northern Massachusettts (now) Maine. Finally the raid on the village of Haverhill, Massachusetts by Jean-Baptiste Hertel de Rouville, Jean-Baptiste de Saint-Ours Deschaillon and their Indian allies on August 29, 1708.  The canadien historians did not consider the killing of Protestants by the French in Schenectady, Deerfield, Wells, Salmon Falls, Haverhill, Fort Oswego and Fort William Henry as crimes or murders, since the victims were not Catholics like themselves.

In 1660, two Frenchmen, Pierre-Esprit Radisson, and his brother-in-law Medart Chouart des Groseilliers wanted to form a fur trading company in New France, but could not do so, because they needed permission from the governor of New France to go west. They still went ahead with their plans, and brought back a fortune in furs, only to have it confiscated by the governor. What was their crime?  It was that they had not paid a bribe to the governor to get permission. It was considered normal in those days by the governors of New France to receive bribes and they had not done so. So, Pierre-Esprit Radisson and Medart Chouart des Groseilliers decided to go to England a get a Royal Charter to trade furs in North America. This they received on May 2, 1670 from King Charles II of Great Britain, and formed the “Governors and the Company of Adventurers of England,” and thus began the Hudson's Bay Company. Both Pierre-Espirit Radisson and his brother-in-law were French Protestants (Huguenots), so their chances of making it in New France were really impossible.  It was the openness of British Protestant society that gave these two Frenchmen a chance. This is the tolerance that most canadien object to, because it does not grant any special rights to them as Catholics. But the system of bribery that existed in New France did not really abate at all after the British Conquest of 1760. What the canadiens were unable to do openly after the conquest of 1760, they now did in secret, and it became a part of modern day canadien tradition and culture.

New British settlers in the colony of Quebec were both Empire Loyalists and Britons, who were enterprising enough to start their own businesses, thus they like most settlers hired people they knew, who had both experience and knowledge. One of these was James McGill, a Scots trader and bachelor. James McGill bequeathed all his money for the building of an English-language university in Montreal, and that university still exists to this very day in Montreal, Quebec. Yes, many Empire Loyalists came to settle in the British colony of Quebec, during and after the American Revolution had ended in 1783. These new immigrants to the colony of Quebec built everything themselves, and did not expect the government to do anything for them, because they believed in the Protestant work ethic: "Hard work never hurt anybody!" Some canadiens are still stuck in a time warp, dating back to the French and Indian war, because they tend to use the word English, instead of British, which is archaic.

It is really a joke when one hears terms like the Quebec Nation, or "We don't want to disappear as a NATION!" Where does this Quebec Nation exist, except in the minds of those who dream in colour. Others say, we don't want to be marginalized and reduced to folkloric people, like what happened to the Cajuns in Louisiana. But those who come out with such statements are suffering with selective amnesia. They somehow overlook the fact that the Louisiana Territory was sold by the Corsican Emperor of France, one Napoleone Buonaparte to the United States of America for the sum of $15 Million borrowed from the Barings Bank of London, England, and a Dutch Banking House in Amsterdam, Holland. It was not that Louisiana meant anything to France, but that it was a cash cow.

Remember that after the sale of Louisiana to the U.S., the Cajuns (Acadians) of Louisiana wrote to U.S. President Thomas Jefferson, asking that they be allowed to continue to keep slaves in the new U.S. possession. Thomas Paine then wrote a letter: To the French inhabitants of Louisiana (1804), where he castigated them for asking permission to hold and import slaves. It was the American patriot Thomas Paine who personally advised President Thomas Jefferson, not to permit slavery in Louisiana.  Are not these not the descendants of the same Cajuns (Acadians) that were deported from Nova Scotia by members of the Massachusetts Militia in 1755- 62? And here they are requesting the U.S. government to permit them to own and import slaves.

Louisiana was treated as a French colony after its return to France by Spain in 1801, and was then sold to U.S. in 1803, and that is why Louisiana became American. The canadiens are truly fortunate that la mere France did not own Quebec in 1803, when France would most likely have sold it to the U.S. Of course no one in Quebec likes to remember the talks that took place between the French and British governments in Paris in 1763 that led to the treaty. The British government offered the return of New France to France, but the French government chose the Molasses rich Island of Guadeloupe in the Caribbean, over New France, refused the British offer.  After all, New France was only a few acres of snow to France.

Today, many Quebecois talk of ‘les patriotes' from the Lower Canada rebellion of 1837, they keep mentioning les canadiens, but completely leave out the real people, who being frustrated by the "Chateau Clique" really started that rebellion. They were the Irish, and Irish immigrants, like Thomas Starrow Brown, Robert and Wolfred Nelson and Edmond Bailey O'Callaghan, their flag which some canadiens do not mention was the GREEN, WHITE and RED flag of the Patriots.  They were not fighting for independence but justice, and the GREEN on their flag represented IRELAND and not FRANCE.  As usual, only canadiens like Louis-Joseph Papineau et al get any credit, and not the IRISH Heroes of the Rebellion. Being so hateful of things not Canadian, some even forget to mention a historical document, like the "Montreal Annexation Manifesto" - October 11, 1849, which was later signed by Louis-Joseph Papineau, calling for Canada's annexation by the United States of America.

Some Quebecois speak with fondness of the memory of the visit to Quebec by the pompous jackass French President Charles De Gaulle, and the undiplomatic speech he gave at Montreal City Hall on July 24, 1967, in which shouted the words: "Vive le Quebec Libre!" But the Quebecois have forgotten to mention that an aide of Charles De Gaulle on a visit to Quebec during World War II, returned to England on discovering that les canadien were sympathetic to the cause of Fascism, rather than le mere France. But they are speaking as representatives of the same country that sold Louisiana to the U.S. in 1803, one wonders why he never shouted: "Vive le Louisiane Libre!" On his visit to the U.S. the general's ramblings were nothing more than meaningless and spurious words, coming out of the mouth of someone who was only a legend in his own mind.

Again, the influence on the canadiens by Abbe Lionel-Adolphe Groulx was far reaching than anyone dares to admit. Here was a man of the cloth, a rabble-rouser, racist and a rabid anti Semite to boot, and a man known for his total distortion of the history of colonial North America. Not only did Abbe Lionel-Adolphe Groulx influence the minds of the canadiens, with his hate-filled religious-nationalist ranting, but also he went on to poison Quebecois society, by using the Catholic versus Protestant approach to all of Quebec's problems. After all, Abble Lionel-Adolphe Groulx's greatest hero was "Il Duce," the Italian despot Benito Mussolini of Fascist Italy.

Many in Quebec neglect to make mention of the attempts of two leftist terrorist, a man and a woman, who loaded a truck with dynamite and drove it across the U.S. border with the intention of blowing up the Statue of Liberty on Liberty Island, NY and the Washington Monument, in Washington, DC. The two terrorists from Quebec were caught by the U.S. police, served light sentences in the U.S., and then deported back to Canada. Does such action by people from Quebec, also represent a blow against what some call U.S. imperialism?  And if so, why?

Then again, there were different groups, like Pierre Bourgault's Rassamblement pour l'Independance Nationale (RIN), the Front de Liberation du Quebec (FLQ), co-founded by Raymond Villeneuve, Gabriel Hudon, and a Belgian immigrant, named George And Schoeters, whose idol was Che Guevara, a good friend of Cuban leader Fidel Castro Ruz.  The ideological leader of the FLQ was one Pierre Vallieres, who was author of the book: "White Niggers of America." And finally the Ralliement National founded by Gilles Gregoire, which was also a left leaning communist oriented political group. The FLQ used bombs to blow up mailboxes etc.  But they also killed a member of the Bomb Squad and later kidnapping also became, its stock in trade.  The FLQ Chenier cell led by Paul Rose and members, Jacques Rose, Francis Simard and Bernard Lortie, they carried out the kidnapping and murder of Quebec Labour Minister Pierre LaPorte on October 10, 1970. They carried out this operation instead of using the ballot box to achieve their goals. Marc Carbonneau, Yves Langlois, Jacques Langtot, Jacques Cosette-Trudel and Louise Langtot, were part of the second FLQ cell which kidnapped British Trade Commissioner James Cross, a Diplomat on October 5, 1970, and held him for ransom, led the second FLQ cell. They got trapped in an apartment building and offered to release the diplomat, in return for being allowed to leave the country. Where was their place of refuge?  Why Cuba of course.

Most political parties in Quebec have leftist leanings and some have links with Cuba. So we know their real aim is not to create a democracy, but a totalitarian State in Quebec. Or should that be a Free Totalitarian POLICE STATE?  The RIN. RN. And the FLQ was later merged into the PARTI QUEBECOIS, which was co-founded by Rene Levesque. Rene Levesque served in the U.S. Army during World War II, and when the war ended returned to Quebec. Like most canadiens, Rene Levesque suffered from an inferiority complex, which usually surfaced whenever he spoke. This New Brunswick born canadien became the leader and co-founder of the Parti Quebecois in Quebec.

Meanwhile the former FLQ Terrorists, who went into exile in Cuba, returned after 8 years and were sanitized. Some even became politicians within the Parti Quebecois, while others became bigwigs in mainstream Quebecois society.

The Quebecois or canadien, have been living under sufferance in Canada from 1763, and still think that they own the country, because they still think of Canada, as Nouvelle-France.  That of course is the illusion under which they still live. Thus Quebecois or canadiens are neither French nor French-Canadiens at all, but a kind of Mestizo/Mestiza by race. They can at best be described as ERSATZ(pseudo) French-Canadians. It's unreal, but they dream of things not as they really are, but as they would like them to be.

The issue of Louis-David Riel which was raised by Quebec premier Honore Mercier in 1885, should be brought up again, because it has been a sore on Canada's back for far too long, and it must be brought to a close. Louis-David Riel was born in Western Canada of mixed parentage; in fact he was only one-eight Metis. He crossed the border into the U.S. and settled in St. Peter's Settlement, Montana, where he became an U.S. citizen. In the meantime he worked as a schoolteacher and later became Sheriff in St. Peter's Settlement, Montana. Louis-David Rile lost all claim to being a Canadian when he became an American citizen. Canadians of that time were British subjects and British subjects were not permitted to hold other citizenships. Further more Louis-David Riel went to the U.S. president of that time, and requested that he annex Manitoba, but the U.S. president, who did not want trouble with Great Britain, denied the request.  Louis-David Riel returned to Manitoba to start an uprising in support of the Metis people. He took over forts in Manitoba and declared himself head of a Provisional Government there. When he was finally captured and tried for treason, there was a terrible injustice done to him. Louis-David Riel was not guilty of treason, as U.S. citizens do not bear allegiance to the British Crown.  He should have been tried as a Terrorist or Insurgent, and also for the murder of Thomas Scott, the Orangeman and government surveyor from Ontario, whom he summarily tried by a Kangaroo Court, and executed on March 4, 1870.

Many Quebecois upheld Quebec's right to pass laws in violation of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights Charter of December 10, 1948, which was signed by John Peters Humphrey on behalf of Canada. But most refuse to answer the question as to why Quebec condemned South African apartheid and demanded that the U.N. place sanctions against that country. Especially so, when they knew that Quebec's Racist Language Laws were far worse than South African apartheid. No country has any laws similar to Quebec in respect of language race. In the case of Quebec, it does not constitute a nation, so it has even less right to do so.

When the Parti Quebecois government of Rene Levesque was in power in Quebec, his Industry Minister, one Rodrigue Biron, gave an interest free loan of $3 Million to his brother Pierre, who was running a small industry in Lotbiniere County. When word got out of this, there were cries of nepotism in the Quebec Legislature, but Premier Rene Levesque arose and immediately declared that that it was not nepotism, since he had declared that a brother was no longer a relative. So, Premier Rene Levesque had decided that he had the power officially to change the meaning of the word NEPOTISM in the dictionary. As Bugs Bunny would say; "What a moron!"  Another of the snafus by Rene Levesque was to prohibit Newfie jokes, because as he put it, they were demeaning.  What Levesque was totally unaware of, was that Newfie jokes were the creation of Newfoundlanders themselves. But how could an insular canadien like Rene Levesque ever know that? But Rene Levesque's abuse of power became evident by his actions. Rene Levesque while having an illicit affair with the secretary of one of his ministers, named Corinne Cote, was exposed for what he really stood for. During the early morning hours while intoxicated he ran over a War Veteran named Edgar Trottier, whom he later falsely claimed was drunk and lying on the road. He got his conviction changed from a DWI charge, to driving without his prescription glasses and paid a fine of $25.00. Meantime his file from the Police Station disappeared under mysterious circumstances. This is the power he had as premier of Quebec.

One of Rene Levesque's ministers named Claude Charron went into an Eaton Department Store in Montreal, QC on January 30, 1982 and was caught by a security officer while carrying out a Tweed jacket that was on sale for $389.00, which he had just stolen. Now there is a true Quebecois for you. They are always looking to get something for nothing.  Claude Charron claimed that the way in which Eaton's advertised their merchandise, made people want to steal.  Thus he was tempted by them, and was therefore not guilty of shoplifting.

What have the canadiens been demanding all along from the English-speaking majority in Canada?  They want to be given a privileged status because of their RACE, their Joual language (French patois) and their Roman Catholic religion. This is totally unacceptable in any democratic society, in which there is a separation of Church and State. No one should ever expect to gain any privileges, by virtue of one's race, language or religion. So what are the canadien really promoting?  Why of course, RACISM in its purest form.  But the canadien does not consider this as RACISM, when it grants special rights to the minority community, to which they belong.  What the canadiens are really asking for is APARTHEID, with the brand NEW name of DISTINCT SOCIETY. How quaint and devious.

Think about the Order of canadienne Catholic Nuns that had a convent called L' hermitage at Cap St-Jacques, near Senneville, and a lot of people would go there along with their children to swim during the summer, as it was along the Riviere des Prairie.  But these Catholic Nuns posted a sign on their property, which said the Protestants were not allowed to swim there.

To go even further, there was a plot of land in Pierrefonds, owned by a Catholic priest from the parish of Ste-Genevieve, QC, who upon putting the land up or sale, put a proviso, stating the land was not to be sold to a member of the Jewish faith. I am sure, if a request was made for the property at 17511 Gouin Blvd. West, Pierrefonds, QC, one can request to see this document.  So much for Quebecois tolerance, that is being falsely touted nowadays.

Finally, this article has to be brought to a close, and it is only befitting that an extract from an important letter written by U.S, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King on May 11, 1942 and mailed a week later on May 18, 1942 be included.

When I was a boy in the <<nineties>>, I used to see a good many French-Canadians who had rather recently come into the New Bedford area, near the old Delano place, at Fair Haven.  They seemed very much out of place in what was still an old New England community.  They segregated themselves in the mill towns and had little to do with their neighbors.  I can still remember that the old generation shook their heads and used to say. <<This is a new element, which will never be assimilated. We are assimilating the Irish, but these Quebec people won't even speak English. Their bodies are here, but their hearts are in Quebec>>.

Today, forty or fifty years later, the French-Canadian elements in Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Rhode Island are at last becoming a part of the American melting pot.  They no longer vote as their churches and societies tell them to.  They are inter-marrying with the original Anglo-Saxon stock; they are good, peaceful citizens, and most of them are speaking English in their homes.

All of this leads me to wonder whether, by some sort of planning, Canada and the United States, working toward the same end, cannot do some planning -- Perhaps unwritten planning which would not even be a public policy - by which we can hasten the objective of assimilating the New England French-Canadians and Canada's French-Canadians into the whole of our respective bodies public.  There are of course, many methods of doing this, which depend on local circumstances.  Wider opportunities can perhaps be given to them in other parts of Canada and the U.S.; and at the same time, certain opportunities can probably be given to the non French-Canadian stock to mingle more greatly with them in their own centers.

Thus after nearly two hundred years with you and after seventy-five years with us, there would seem to be no good reason for great differentials between the French population elements and the rest of the racial stocks.

It is on the same basis that I am trying to work out post-war plans for the encouragement of the distribution of certain other nationalities in our large congested centers.  There ought not to be such a concentration of Italians and of Jews, even Germans as we have today in New York City.  I have started my National Resources Planning Commission on a survey of this kind.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President of the United States of America
The White House
Washington, DC
USA

Researched and written by Kenneth T. Tellis